If the game is being developed with XBO/PS4 specs in mind then it simply won't come to Wii U. Period. No support or huge sales spike is going to change that.

Developers don't want to downgrade their games even if it means selling more copies. Accept it and move on. This generation will be another Wii vs. PS360 generation, and the last "Next gen" games the Wii U will get (Like Watch Dogs) will come because they are on PS360.

I would help you out with the campaign if this game was also on PS360, but it's not, and there's a power gap between the Wii U and the rest of the consoles.

Click to expand...

You fail to realize that we are in the era of scalbiliity. If UE4 can made to run on a smartphone then it could likely run on Wii U. The thing is developers are potentially getting close to maxing out PS4 and X1 already since they are so similar to PCs. Another thing is how much would they have to downgrade their games in order to fit on Wii U? If its only a minor graphical change and doesn't mean having to strip out entire features and content then I don't see why not

Click to expand...

I have posted this before refuting your "scalable engine" argument, but you just let it slip by: Just because you can scale an engine doesn't mean a game using that engine CAN be scaled down.

Engines are scalable, yes, that is a fact, yet this argument fails to consider that games themselves tend to have set, fixed targets that consider the weakest link on the development chain from planning stages, which means that games themselves may not be scalable beyond a certain point even when the engine itself is.

A scable engine means it supports a wide array of platforms when toned down or decreasing the fidelity of certain effects, which gets nullified when game development is pushing the engine, which tends to result on weaker platforms getting dropped for the sake of benefiting development on stronger ones. Frostbite 3.0 is on mobile yet it does not support the Wii U while it supports iPhone 4. That does not mean you'll get Battlefield 4 on an iPhone 4 because the development target of the game itself is beyond the iPhone 4's hardware capabilities even though the engine itself runs on iPhone 4. Same deal as Unreal Engine 3 and iPhone 3G, it runs the engine but it doesn't mean the hardware can handle Gears of War.

It's the same case as the Wii U. Once developers draw a line for a game and say "We won't go lower than this" then affected platforms are dropped. I would at least for once like you to try to refute this argument.

If the game is being developed with XBO/PS4 specs in mind then it simply won't come to Wii U. Period. No support or huge sales spike is going to change that.

Developers don't want to downgrade their games even if it means selling more copies. Accept it and move on. This generation will be another Wii vs. PS360 generation, and the last "Next gen" games the Wii U will get (Like Watch Dogs) will come because they are on PS360.

I would help you out with the campaign if this game was also on PS360, but it's not, and there's a power gap between the Wii U and the rest of the consoles.

Click to expand...

You fail to realize that we are in the era of scalbiliity. If UE4 can made to run on a smartphone then it could likely run on Wii U. The thing is developers are potentially getting close to maxing out PS4 and X1 already since they are so similar to PCs. Another thing is how much would they have to downgrade their games in order to fit on Wii U? If its only a minor graphical change and doesn't mean having to strip out entire features and content then I don't see why not

Click to expand...

I have posted this before refuting your "scalable engine" argument, but you just let it slip by: Just because you can scale an engine doesn't mean a game using that engine CAN be scaled down.

Engines are scalable, yes, that is a fact, yet this argument fails to consider that games themselves tend to have set, fixed targets that consider the weakest link on the development chain from planning stages, which means that games themselves may not be scalable beyond a certain point even when the engine itself is.

A scable engine means it supports a wide array of platforms when toned down or decreasing the fidelity of certain effects, which gets nullified when game development is pushing the engine, which tends to result on weaker platforms getting dropped for the sake of benefiting development on stronger ones. Frostbite 3.0 is on mobile yet it does not support the Wii U while it supports iPhone 4. That does not mean you'll get Battlefield 4 on an iPhone 4 because the development target of the game itself is beyond the iPhone 4's hardware capabilities even though the engine itself runs on iPhone 4. Same deal as Unreal Engine 3 and iPhone 3G, it runs the engine but it doesn't mean the hardware can handle Gears of War.

It's the same case as the Wii U. Once developers draw a line for a game and say "We won't go lower than this" then affected platforms are dropped. I would at least for once like you to try to refute this argument.

Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better myself. This is always brought up in every argument.

If the game is being developed with XBO/PS4 specs in mind then it simply won't come to Wii U. Period. No support or huge sales spike is going to change that.

Developers don't want to downgrade their games even if it means selling more copies. Accept it and move on. This generation will be another Wii vs. PS360 generation, and the last "Next gen" games the Wii U will get (Like Watch Dogs) will come because they are on PS360.

I would help you out with the campaign if this game was also on PS360, but it's not, and there's a power gap between the Wii U and the rest of the consoles.

Click to expand...

That's complete nonsense. If putting it on the Wii U actually meant selling more copies, then there would be a Wii U version.

Click to expand...

Developers don't want to downgrade their games past a certain point even if it means selling more copies. If they set development targets and some consoles can't comply, they are dropped.

If the game is being developed with XBO/PS4 specs in mind then it simply won't come to Wii U. Period. No support or huge sales spike is going to change that.

Developers don't want to downgrade their games even if it means selling more copies. Accept it and move on. This generation will be another Wii vs. PS360 generation, and the last "Next gen" games the Wii U will get (Like Watch Dogs) will come because they are on PS360.

I would help you out with the campaign if this game was also on PS360, but it's not, and there's a power gap between the Wii U and the rest of the consoles.

Click to expand...

That's complete nonsense. If putting it on the Wii U actually meant selling more copies, then there would be a Wii U version.

Click to expand...

Developers don't want to downgrade their games past a certain point even if it means selling more copies. If they set development targets and some consoles can't comply, they are dropped.

Click to expand...

Developers don't have a choice in the matter. If Warner brothers wanted the game on the Wii U then the game would be on the Wii U.

If the game is being developed with XBO/PS4 specs in mind then it simply won't come to Wii U. Period. No support or huge sales spike is going to change that.

Developers don't want to downgrade their games even if it means selling more copies. Accept it and move on. This generation will be another Wii vs. PS360 generation, and the last "Next gen" games the Wii U will get (Like Watch Dogs) will come because they are on PS360.

I would help you out with the campaign if this game was also on PS360, but it's not, and there's a power gap between the Wii U and the rest of the consoles.

Click to expand...

You fail to realize that we are in the era of scalbiliity. If UE4 can made to run on a smartphone then it could likely run on Wii U. The thing is developers are potentially getting close to maxing out PS4 and X1 already since they are so similar to PCs. Another thing is how much would they have to downgrade their games in order to fit on Wii U? If its only a minor graphical change and doesn't mean having to strip out entire features and content then I don't see why not

Click to expand...

I have posted this before refuting your "scalable engine" argument, but you just let it slip by: Just because you can scale an engine doesn't mean a game using that engine CAN be scaled down.

Engines are scalable, yes, that is a fact, yet this argument fails to consider that games themselves tend to have set, fixed targets that consider the weakest link on the development chain from planning stages, which means that games themselves may not be scalable beyond a certain point even when the engine itself is.

A scable engine means it supports a wide array of platforms when toned down or decreasing the fidelity of certain effects, which gets nullified when game development is pushing the engine, which tends to result on weaker platforms getting dropped for the sake of benefiting development on stronger ones. Frostbite 3.0 is on mobile yet it does not support the Wii U while it supports iPhone 4. That does not mean you'll get Battlefield 4 on an iPhone 4 because the development target of the game itself is beyond the iPhone 4's hardware capabilities even though the engine itself runs on iPhone 4. Same deal as Unreal Engine 3 and iPhone 3G, it runs the engine but it doesn't mean the hardware can handle Gears of War.

It's the same case as the Wii U. Once developers draw a line for a game and say "We won't go lower than this" then affected platforms are dropped. I would at least for once like you to try to refute this argument.

Click to expand...

I was going to write this and then I saw your post. You get it, but lots of people don't.

Scalability? Sure. But you don't see PS4 and Xbox One games being ported to smartphones. There might be a companion app, but not the same game entirely. Just because an engine is scalable, doesn't mean there is no work involved in making a high-end game work on a less powerful platform. There is no magic button. Let's just take memory into consideration for example. The PS4 has 8GB of RAM, the Wii U has 2GB. Reportedly, 5GB and 1GB is available for the games themselves, respectively. So that means the PS4 has 5 times more memory available for games. Let's just say devs start to actually use all that memory. Well, getting all that to fit in 5 times less memory is actually pretty hard. It doesn't always mean just reducing the size of textures, and downgrading assets. It means removing lots of them. It means less variety. Sometimes it could mean potentially removing features, because they don't fit in memory, and if they are downgraded too much to fit, they don't make sense anymore or are so bare-bones that people wouldn't like them.

If the game is being developed with XBO/PS4 specs in mind then it simply won't come to Wii U. Period. No support or huge sales spike is going to change that.

Developers don't want to downgrade their games even if it means selling more copies. Accept it and move on. This generation will be another Wii vs. PS360 generation, and the last "Next gen" games the Wii U will get (Like Watch Dogs) will come because they are on PS360.

I would help you out with the campaign if this game was also on PS360, but it's not, and there's a power gap between the Wii U and the rest of the consoles.

Click to expand...

You fail to realize that we are in the era of scalbiliity. If UE4 can made to run on a smartphone then it could likely run on Wii U. The thing is developers are potentially getting close to maxing out PS4 and X1 already since they are so similar to PCs. Another thing is how much would they have to downgrade their games in order to fit on Wii U? If its only a minor graphical change and doesn't mean having to strip out entire features and content then I don't see why not

Click to expand...

I have posted this before refuting your "scalable engine" argument, but you just let it slip by: Just because you can scale an engine doesn't mean a game using that engine CAN be scaled down.

Engines are scalable, yes, that is a fact, yet this argument fails to consider that games themselves tend to have set, fixed targets that consider the weakest link on the development chain from planning stages, which means that games themselves may not be scalable beyond a certain point even when the engine itself is.

A scable engine means it supports a wide array of platforms when toned down or decreasing the fidelity of certain effects, which gets nullified when game development is pushing the engine, which tends to result on weaker platforms getting dropped for the sake of benefiting development on stronger ones. Frostbite 3.0 is on mobile yet it does not support the Wii U while it supports iPhone 4. That does not mean you'll get Battlefield 4 on an iPhone 4 because the development target of the game itself is beyond the iPhone 4's hardware capabilities even though the engine itself runs on iPhone 4. Same deal as Unreal Engine 3 and iPhone 3G, it runs the engine but it doesn't mean the hardware can handle Gears of War.

It's the same case as the Wii U. Once developers draw a line for a game and say "We won't go lower than this" then affected platforms are dropped. I would at least for once like you to try to refute this argument.

Click to expand...

Refute what argument?

You have no idea on what that "line" is... The fact that is not coming to Wii U probably has more to do with sales than that "line".

The Wii U is the least powerful console this gen, but it's not as far as you make it out to be.

And yeah the whole point on using an engine is to be able to compile it for different hardware with minimal changes, it does it for you. Have you ever used an engine?

RAM is the least impediment for game development, there a lot of ways of using RAM instead of just having a bunch of it and throw it everything you can! The Wii U and Xbox one approach is a lot faster and more efficient, but it does require to code for it, instead of just throwing things at it.

Take a look at MGS V or whatever is called, on the Xbox One it looks just a little better than on the Xbox 360. Lots of people have said they won't even buy it because of that on the Xbox One. On the OS4 it does look noticeably better, you're telling me that they won't want to scale a game like that again?

You have no idea on what that "line" is... The fact that is not coming to Wii U probably has more to do with sales than that "line".

The Wii U is the least powerful console this gen, but it's not as far as you make it out to be.

Click to expand...

Read Twisted Devil Mind's follow-up to my post. Read it from an actual developer. "Power" is not just the maximum theoretical CPU/GPU FLOPS. It's the entire hardware; including the pitiful amount of system memory. Your biggest bottleneck is your weakest component (Amount of memory) regardless of how powerful your best component (Speed of memory) might actually be.

And yeah the whole point on using an engine is to be able to compile it for different hardware with minimal changes, it does it for you. Have you ever used an engine?

Click to expand...

I am in the planning stages of my own PC game, and have been experimenting with CryEngine 3, Unreal Engine 3, and Unity 4. So yes, I have used game engines, and still stand by my post saying that just because you can scale UE3 doesn't mean an iPhone 3G will run Gears of War, and an iPhone 4 won't run Battlefield 4.

Take a look at MGS V or whatever is called, on the Xbox One it looks just a little better than on the Xbox 360. Lots of people have said they won't even buy it because of that on the Xbox One. On the OS4 it does look noticeably better, you're telling me that they won't want to scale a game like that again?

Click to expand...

Cross-gen games are inherently held-back by last-gen hardware. Look at The Division, look at The Witcher 3. Those games blow anything PS360 out of the water, including the "next-gen" versions of MGSV.

You have no idea on what that "line" is... The fact that is not coming to Wii U probably has more to do with sales than that "line".

The Wii U is the least powerful console this gen, but it's not as far as you make it out to be.

Click to expand...

Read Twisted Devil Mind's follow-up to my post. Read it from an actual developer. "Power" is not just the maximum theoretical CPU/GPU FLOPS. It's the entire hardware; including the pitiful amount of system memory. Your biggest bottleneck is your weakest component (Amount of memory) regardless of how powerful your best component (Speed of memory) might actually be.

And yeah the whole point on using an engine is to be able to compile it for different hardware with minimal changes, it does it for you. Have you ever used an engine?

Click to expand...

I am in the planning stages of my own PC game, and have been experimenting with CryEngine 3, Unreal Engine 3, and Unity 4. So yes, I have used game engines, and still stand by my post saying that just because you can scale UE3 doesn't mean an iPhone 3G will run Gears of War.

Take a look at MGS V or whatever is called, on the Xbox One it looks just a little better than on the Xbox 360. Lots of people have said they won't even buy it because of that on the Xbox One. On the OS4 it does look noticeably better, you're telling me that they won't want to scale a game like that again?

Click to expand...

Cross-gen games are inherently held-back by last-gen hardware. Look at The Division, look at The Witcher 3. Those games blow anything PS360 out of the water, including the "next-gen" versions of MGSV.

Click to expand...

I read it, that's why I said something about the RAM...

For what I know she models assets.

The fact that an iPhone can't run GoW means nothing about the Wii U. If you think there is as much leap as that, you're wrong.

If you have used Unity or Cryengine, you would know that you can easily scale games for the Wii U on those engines, easily. In fact you create a single game project even if your compling for many platforms, and yes at least those two engines, that I have used quite extensibly now allow you to turn on and off all the features, including effects, particles, certaing lighting, etc... That's the point of having an engine!

I have yet to see a single game that is a big leap from last gen. And until I see it running live I won't go as far as claiming they do, the same was said of BF4, MGS V, and a bunch of other games. The only one close to looking next gen is Ryse.

The fact is that neither you nor I know what that "line" is. And right now it's a lot more likely that games are not coming because they don't sell well on Nintendo consoles.

If you have used Unity or Cryengine, you would know that you can easily scale games for the Wii U on those engines, easily. In fact you create a single game project even if your compling for many platforms, and yes at least those two engines, that I have used quite extensibly now allow you to turn on and off all the features, including effects, particles, certaing lighting, etc... That's the point of having an engine!

Click to expand...

And you just killed the Wii U trying to defend it:

twisted devil mind said:

It doesn't always mean just reducing the size of textures, and downgrading assets. It means removing lots of them. It means less variety. Sometimes it could mean potentially removing features, because they don't fit in memory, and if they are downgraded too much to fit, they don't make sense anymore or are so bare-bones that people wouldn't like them.

Click to expand...

It's true that neither one of us know the actual "line" developers are drawing, but I believe you are underestimating the gap between XBO/PS4 and the Wii U just because you don't see it. Some developers don't want to "turn off" the features, and if the Wii U can't handle the game as the developer envisions with the engine features on, then it gets dropped. Developers have no obligation to make their games uglier just so they can run on a platform.

You have no idea on what that "line" is... The fact that is not coming to Wii U probably has more to do with sales than that "line".

The Wii U is the least powerful console this gen, but it's not as far as you make it out to be.

Click to expand...

Read Twisted Devil Mind's follow-up to my post. Read it from an actual developer. "Power" is not just the maximum theoretical CPU/GPU FLOPS. It's the entire hardware; including the pitiful amount of system memory. Your biggest bottleneck is your weakest component (Amount of memory) regardless of how powerful your best component (Speed of memory) might actually be.

And yeah the whole point on using an engine is to be able to compile it for different hardware with minimal changes, it does it for you. Have you ever used an engine?

Click to expand...

I am in the planning stages of my own PC game, and have been experimenting with CryEngine 3, Unreal Engine 3, and Unity 4. So yes, I have used game engines, and still stand by my post saying that just because you can scale UE3 doesn't mean an iPhone 3G will run Gears of War.

Take a look at MGS V or whatever is called, on the Xbox One it looks just a little better than on the Xbox 360. Lots of people have said they won't even buy it because of that on the Xbox One. On the OS4 it does look noticeably better, you're telling me that they won't want to scale a game like that again?

Click to expand...

Cross-gen games are inherently held-back by last-gen hardware. Look at The Division, look at The Witcher 3. Those games blow anything PS360 out of the water, including the "next-gen" versions of MGSV.

Click to expand...

I read it, that's why I said something about the RAM...

For what I know she models assets.

The fact that an iPhone can't run GoW means nothing about the Wii U. If you think there is as much leap as that, you're wrong.

If you have used Unity or Cryengine, you would know that you can easily scale games for the Wii U on those engines, easily. In fact you create a single game project even if your compling for many platforms, and yes at least those two engines, that I have used quite extensibly now allow you to turn on and off all the features, including effects, particles, certaing lighting, etc... That's the point of having an engine!

I have yet to see a single game that is a big leap from last gen. And until I see it running live I won't go as far as claiming they do, the same was said of BF4, MGS V, and a bunch of other games. The only one close to looking next gen is Ryse.

The fact is that neither you nor I know what that "line" is. And right now it's a lot more likely that games are not coming because they don't sell well on Nintendo consoles.

Click to expand...

I don't just model assets. Actually, I haven't done much of that on my current project. I've done technical work. Currently I am analyzing captures and pointing out the bottlenecks to improve framerate. This whole project, what I've done is make sure things fit in memory and run as smoothly as they can on old hardware. Yes, there are lots of presets in engines, lots of things you can turn off, or on. But just because it works on your PC, doesn't mean it actually works on the console.

I've used RAM as an example, because I thought it was a fairly easy subject to understand. The amount of times I have seen the words "Out of Memory" in my career is in the hundreds, if not thousands.

Read Twisted Devil Mind's follow-up to my post. Read it from an actual developer. "Power" is not just the maximum theoretical CPU/GPU FLOPS. It's the entire hardware; including the pitiful amount of system memory. Your biggest bottleneck is your weakest component (Amount of memory) regardless of how powerful your best component (Speed of memory) might actually be.

I am in the planning stages of my own PC game, and have been experimenting with CryEngine 3, Unreal Engine 3, and Unity 4. So yes, I have used game engines, and still stand by my post saying that just because you can scale UE3 doesn't mean an iPhone 3G will run Gears of War.

Cross-gen games are inherently held-back by last-gen hardware. Look at The Division, look at The Witcher 3. Those games blow anything PS360 out of the water, including the "next-gen" versions of MGSV.

Click to expand...

I read it, that's why I said something about the RAM...

For what I know she models assets.

The fact that an iPhone can't run GoW means nothing about the Wii U. If you think there is as much leap as that, you're wrong.

If you have used Unity or Cryengine, you would know that you can easily scale games for the Wii U on those engines, easily. In fact you create a single game project even if your compling for many platforms, and yes at least those two engines, that I have used quite extensibly now allow you to turn on and off all the features, including effects, particles, certaing lighting, etc... That's the point of having an engine!

I have yet to see a single game that is a big leap from last gen. And until I see it running live I won't go as far as claiming they do, the same was said of BF4, MGS V, and a bunch of other games. The only one close to looking next gen is Ryse.

The fact is that neither you nor I know what that "line" is. And right now it's a lot more likely that games are not coming because they don't sell well on Nintendo consoles.

Click to expand...

I don't just model assets. Actually, I haven't done much of that on my current project. I've done technical work. Currently I am analyzing captures and pointing out the bottlenecks to improve framerate. This whole project, what I've done is make sure things fit in memory and run as smoothly as they can on old hardware. Yes, there are lots of presets in engines, lots of things you can turn off, or on. But just because it works on your PC, doesn't mean it actually works on the console.

I've used RAM as an example, because I thought it was a fairly easy subject to understand. The amount of times I have seen the words "Out of Memory" in my career is in the hundreds, if not thousands.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, then you know that you can make a great looking game run on somewhat a small amount of RAM. Thats what you're doing right now... There are ways to code for it in an efficient way and make it happen, the whole RAM hierarchy of the Wii U is very different than on a PC or the PS4.

I have 24GB of RAM, and have run out of memory many times while using Mari, Mudbox, Z Brush and even AE. Because those software aren't optimized to use it, they just throw everything they have to it.

The fact that an iPhone can't run GoW means nothing about the Wii U. If you think there is as much leap as that, you're wrong.

If you have used Unity or Cryengine, you would know that you can easily scale games for the Wii U on those engines, easily. In fact you create a single game project even if your compling for many platforms, and yes at least those two engines, that I have used quite extensibly now allow you to turn on and off all the features, including effects, particles, certaing lighting, etc... That's the point of having an engine!

I have yet to see a single game that is a big leap from last gen. And until I see it running live I won't go as far as claiming they do, the same was said of BF4, MGS V, and a bunch of other games. The only one close to looking next gen is Ryse.

The fact is that neither you nor I know what that "line" is. And right now it's a lot more likely that games are not coming because they don't sell well on Nintendo consoles.

Click to expand...

I don't just model assets. Actually, I haven't done much of that on my current project. I've done technical work. Currently I am analyzing captures and pointing out the bottlenecks to improve framerate. This whole project, what I've done is make sure things fit in memory and run as smoothly as they can on old hardware. Yes, there are lots of presets in engines, lots of things you can turn off, or on. But just because it works on your PC, doesn't mean it actually works on the console.

I've used RAM as an example, because I thought it was a fairly easy subject to understand. The amount of times I have seen the words "Out of Memory" in my career is in the hundreds, if not thousands.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, then you know that you can make a great looking game run on somewhat a small amount of RAM. Thats what you're doing right now... There are ways to code for it in an efficient way and make it happen, the whole RAM hierarchy of the Wii U is very different than on a PC or the PS4.

I have 24GB of RAM, and have run out of memory many times while using Mari, Mudbox, Z Brush and even AE. Because those software aren't optimized to use it, they just throw everything they have to it.

Click to expand...

What I am saying is that there is a lot of work involved. Just playing with the engine presets isn't enough. And what you need to think about is that with your 24GB of RAM, you can have all those programs open at the same time (or almost). If you had, say, 6GB, you'd run out a lot faster. You can downgrade assets only to a certain extent before they are really ugly. There needs to be a balance between aesthetics and memory consumption, which is what takes time. Those presets don't magically make things lighter and pretty.

I don't just model assets. Actually, I haven't done much of that on my current project. I've done technical work. Currently I am analyzing captures and pointing out the bottlenecks to improve framerate. This whole project, what I've done is make sure things fit in memory and run as smoothly as they can on old hardware. Yes, there are lots of presets in engines, lots of things you can turn off, or on. But just because it works on your PC, doesn't mean it actually works on the console.

I've used RAM as an example, because I thought it was a fairly easy subject to understand. The amount of times I have seen the words "Out of Memory" in my career is in the hundreds, if not thousands.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, then you know that you can make a great looking game run on somewhat a small amount of RAM. Thats what you're doing right now... There are ways to code for it in an efficient way and make it happen, the whole RAM hierarchy of the Wii U is very different than on a PC or the PS4.

I have 24GB of RAM, and have run out of memory many times while using Mari, Mudbox, Z Brush and even AE. Because those software aren't optimized to use it, they just throw everything they have to it.

Click to expand...

What I am saying is that there is a lot of work involved. Just playing with the engine presets isn't enough. And what you need to think about is that with your 24GB of RAM, you can have all those programs open at the same time (or almost). If you had, say, 6GB, you'd run out a lot faster. You can downgrade assets only to a certain extent before they are really ugly. There needs to be a balance between aesthetics and memory consumption, which is what takes time. Those presets don't magically make things lighter and pretty.

Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that you don't need to make them look ugly in order to port the to the Wii U. Or at least as the examples is presented. BF3 and Crysis on high end PC to the PS360.

There is no way you can paint 4K textures in realtime or and or sculpt with at least 4 sub divisions in either Z brush or Mudbox with only 6GB of RAM, even if it's faster. And there is no way you can make a decent RAM preview with 6GB of ram of more than 10 seconds using 4K assets.

Fair enough, then you know that you can make a great looking game run on somewhat a small amount of RAM. Thats what you're doing right now... There are ways to code for it in an efficient way and make it happen, the whole RAM hierarchy of the Wii U is very different than on a PC or the PS4.

I have 24GB of RAM, and have run out of memory many times while using Mari, Mudbox, Z Brush and even AE. Because those software aren't optimized to use it, they just throw everything they have to it.

Click to expand...

What I am saying is that there is a lot of work involved. Just playing with the engine presets isn't enough. And what you need to think about is that with your 24GB of RAM, you can have all those programs open at the same time (or almost). If you had, say, 6GB, you'd run out a lot faster. You can downgrade assets only to a certain extent before they are really ugly. There needs to be a balance between aesthetics and memory consumption, which is what takes time. Those presets don't magically make things lighter and pretty.

Click to expand...

What I'm saying is that you don't need to make them look ugly in order to port the to the Wii U. Or at least as the examples is presented. BF3 and Crysis on high end PC to the PS360.

There is no way you can paint 4K textures in realtime or and or sculpt with at least 4 sub divisions in either Z brush or Mudbox with only 6GB of RAM, even if it's faster. And there is no way you can make a decent RAM preview with 6GB of ram of more than 10 seconds using 4K assets.

Click to expand...

I never said we should make things look ugly. Quite the contrary. I said we should do what's best to make it look good, but that it involves a lot of work if the assets must be downgraded to fit in memory.

And just like you say it's not possible to paint 4K textures in realtime in ZBrush with only 6GB of RAM, I'm saying there is only so much you can do with the Wii U's limited amount of RAM. I'm not saying nothing can be done. Obviously we have cross-gen ports right now for a lot of games, and the PS3 and 360 have less RAM than the Wii U does. However, then you have the CPU and the GPU and all that, which of course differ once again and present different challenges on different consoles...

In any case, I do hope the Wii U gets great games. I'd very much like to see many new Wii U exclusives.

I'd like to see this Project CARS you and others keep talking about. I think I'll go borrow it when it gets released. I want to be amazed too.

Why are you still tinkering with the potential power of the WiiU as a whole, the Gamepad also sucks some performance out of the system, so it is the worst hardware in the 7th generation, but that doesn't mean that it won't produce good games with good graphics for about a year and a half from now.

Click to expand...

Nope, you have that totally wrong. Output to the GP doesn't use any hardware threads as @bomblord has already infored you. Its not cast either, its distributed through process and can be asynchronous or paired.
As for me, personally, I am interested in whats inside because I began with a hunch of my own. Now given I'm an engineer I'm certainly not going to take advice from anyone that puts forward a notion and beggars me to be one with their sucinct disbelief.

I`m just waiting for the next Metroid to really show what the system can do, as the Mario games always look great, but technically they use allot of optical tricks(on the user)to gain performance while game looking great for the player.

Click to expand...

Yes well, you want check-out chicks, playing with interactive media editors and calling that gaming technical knowledge, be my guest; I find that notion utterly pretentious and revolting.
You have PS4/X1 for that in any event and can swallow whatever makes you happy. Where Nintendo development is concerned its fairly obvious that kinda repetitious production doesn't exist. They have full technical knowledge and control over their gaming environment from the first byte to the end credits.

It's been basically confirmed that the framebuffer for the gamepad is free. If the gamepad is using a second camera than there's obviously rendering involved but the act of sending an image to the gamepad does not effect the system.

I have some technical knowledge on the matter, but I choose to use layman's terms, so that people understand it better.

I fail to see how outputting to a second screen with a wireless connection doesn't hamper performance. I`m not saying it takes 15% like the kintect, but a small performance chop is imminent.

Anyway, I do not own a WiiU, i owned a Gamecube back in the day, I`m a PC user mostly. But I have a friend who owns a WiiU and Wii, so I`ve played games on them.

Good looking games can be done on a platform as long as they are being built specifically for that platform and from the ground up.

Some of you fail to realize the big difference in programming for a x86 CPU and a RISC CPU and the amount of rewrite that developers had to do in the previous generation of consoles, to make a game for all platforms, especially Sony's Cell.

The WiiU is in the situation that Sony was with the PS3, however Sony payed allot to developers to develop games for their console and most importantly to market their console properly. The PS3 was an instant success and developers knew that the money they invested to bring their games to Sony's console would be redeemed.

Now the WiiU didn't take off, although developers were backing the console before it`s launch. They backed off, because it wouldn't have been financially wise for them to spend allot of manpower and funds to port a game, that would sell 100,000 copies if lucky.

Christ, Nintendo's own software is not selling very well on it`s own console, because of the small user base at the moment.

Basically Nintendo blew it with the naming and marketing, if they went with Wii 2, it would have sold allot better, not 6,7 million, but at least a few million units more.

I have some technical knowledge on the matter, but I choose to use layman's terms, so that people understand it better.

I fail to see how outputting to a second screen with a wireless connection doesn't hamper performance. I`m not saying it takes 15% like the kintect, but a small performance chop is imminent.

Anyway, I do not own a WiiU, i owned a Gamecube back in the day, I`m a PC user mostly. But I have a friend who owns a WiiU and Wii, so I`ve played games on them.

Good looking games can be done on a platform as long as they are being built specifically for that platform and from the ground up.

Some of you fail to realize the big difference in programming for a x86 CPU and a RISC CPU and the amount of rewrite that developers had to do in the previous generation of consoles, to make a game for all platforms, especially Sony's Cell.

The WiiU is in the situation that Sony was with the PS3, however Sony payed allot to developers to develop games for their console and most importantly to market their console properly. The PS3 was an instant success and developers knew that the money they invested to bring their games to Sony's console would be redeemed.

Now the WiiU didn't take off, although developers were backing the console before it`s launch. They backed off, because it wouldn't have been financially wise for them to spend allot of manpower and funds to port a game, that would sell 100,000 copies if lucky.

Christ, Nintendo's own software is not selling very well on it`s own console, because of the small user base at the moment.

Basically Nintendo blew it with the naming and marketing, if they went with Wii 2, it would have sold allot better, not 6,7 million, but at least a few million units more.

Click to expand...

few things. One it doesn't take a performance hit thanks to DEDICATED HARDWARE. Stuff in the system that has only the task of doing that function. Such as how the OS runs on its own dedicated arm processor.

not you cant put the Cell chip in the same boat as the espresso. Cell is a high performance processor that was legitimately different than most devs work with. Whereas the espresso is basic PPC, which is something devs have been working with for long enough to know how to make the changes needed.

It's simple. Developers either know how to work on PC(×86), or 7th generation PPC. They technically have to be figured out separately. Whatever they did in 6th gen needs to happen again, because GCN and Xbox were different architectures as well, had different specs, and generally had the same performance.

I`m not saying that developers don't know how to code for different architectures of CPU, but that it costs allot more to have a game done for different consoles, with different CPU arch. It depends if the specified port to the specified machine can cover it's costs and make money. That's the most important thing to CEO's of game making companies.

Is the Witcher 3, Battlefield 4 or other ports possible on the WiiU - YES! Would it be profitable at this point, most likely NOT.

An AAA game needs at least two million copies on a platform to be profitable, when an Indie game needs 100 000, and there is no guarantee that the AAA title will be a better game than the Indie, as we have seen in recent times.
Nintendo needs to have more software, so that it can sell hardware. It`s always been like this in the console market.

I`ll give you a direct comparison.

The PS Vita is a more powerful console than the 3DS, is it the better selling console of the two - by a huge margin NO. The 3DS has better software in quantity and especially in quality. So, why can't they produce this for the WiiU.
The Wii is a different case, there Nintendo just tapped into a market that none of competition cared for - NON GAMERS!

I`m not saying that developers don't know how to code for different architectures of CPU, but that it costs allot more to have a game done for different consoles, with different CPU arch. It depends if the specified port to the specified machine can cover it's costs and make money. That's the most important thing to CEO's of game making companies.

Is the Witcher 3, Battlefield 4 or other ports possible on the WiiU - YES! Would it be profitable at this point, most likely NOT.

An AAA game needs at least two million copies on a platform to be profitable, when an Indie game needs 100 000, and there is no guarantee that the AAA title will be a better game than the Indie, as we have seen in recent times.
Nintendo needs to have more software, so that it can sell hardware. It`s always been like this in the console market.

I`ll give you a direct comparison.

The PS Vita is a more powerful console than the 3DS, is it the better selling console of the two - by a huge margin NO. The 3DS has better software in quantity and especially in quality. So, why can't they produce this for the WiiU.
The Wii is a different case, there Nintendo just tapped into a market that none of competition cared for - NON GAMERS!

Click to expand...

The cost of porting though different architectures is negligible for AAA games. They only have to sell about 50k copies to cover the cost of porting.

Yeah, that's kind of the dirty little secret right now in gaming. Nintendo has a set up with which serious, skilled professionals can work wonders with but a framework that can help the lesser skilled put out decent games, while the others have a system in place that caters more to the lesser skilled than anything else.

Nintendo is taking the next step forward in regard to controlling costs without only having a machine you can throw anything at, and they are taking under their wing the skilled indies and building them up for the future.

Click to expand...

Where did you come to this conclusion from?

MMO gamers are the easiest people in the world to scam with a product using tapatalk

"Bandwidth
The PS3 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and 25.6 GB/s of RDRAM bandwidth for a total system bandwidth of 48 GB/s.The Xbox 360 has 22.4 GB/s of GDDR3 bandwidth and a 256 GB/s of EDRAM bandwidth for a total of 278.4 GB/s total system bandwidth.

​

Why does the Xbox 360 have such an extreme amount of bandwidth?Even the simplest calculations show that a large amount of bandwidth is consumed by the frame buffer. For example, with simple color rendering and Z testing at 550 MHz the frame buffer alone requires 52.8 GB/s at 8 pixels per clock. The PS3's memory bandwidth is insufficient to maintain its GPU's peak rendering speed, even without texture and vertex fetches.The PS3 uses Z and color compression to try to compensate for the lack of memory bandwidth. The problem with Z and color compression is that the compression breaks down quickly when rendering complex next-generation 3D scenes.HDR, alpha-blending, and anti-aliasing require even more memory bandwidth. This is why Xbox 360 has 256 GB/s bandwidth reserved just for the frame buffer. This allows the Xbox 360 GPU to do Z testing, HDR, and alpha blended color rendering with 4X MSAA at full rate and still have the entire main bus bandwidth of 22.4 GB/s left over for textures and vertices.CONCLUSION
When you break down the numbers, Xbox 360 has provably more performance than PS3. Keep in mind that Sony has a track record of over promising and under delivering on technical performance. The truth is that both systems pack a lot of power for high definition games and entertainment.However, hardware performance, while important, is only a third of the puzzle. Xbox 360 is a fusion of hardware, software and services. Without the software and services to power it, even the most powerful hardware becomes inconsequential. Xbox 360 games—by leveraging cutting-edge hardware, software, and services—will outperform the PlayStation 3.
"

as we can see, frambuffer requires bandwidth, so if shinen can achieve 1080p framebuffer with just about 16MB of edram on wii u and requires 10MB OF 256GB/s for the 720p, well, it becomes obvious that for 1080p framebuffer you require lots of bandwidth

@nohumanape
Kind of. Some indies are making just as high quality of content as these AAA developers. Giana Sisters could probably last you 5 hours and is about on the same technical scope of a that Child of Light Ubisoft game, minus a higher framerate and resolution.

Another example would be Project Cars. How much better is Forza 5 or GT? Most people wouldn't even tell the difference between a small budget indie game or a big budget "hype" game. If you throw Bejeweled or those infinite run games, there's a ton of s*** people can do.

When Wii U first started getting indie games, all I could imagine was smartphone games making the jump to console graphics and more complex software development.

Guacamelee is coming out for Wii U, too. That looks like Rayman Legends, IMO. Besides ZombiU plays kind of like an indie game, even though I personally enjoyed the game.

EDIT: In otherwords, indies are or can potentially catch up to the big guys, and big games are costing more and more with little to no return anyway.

@nohumanape
Kind of. Some indies are making just as high quality of content as these AAA developers. Giana Sisters could probably last you 5 hours and is about on the same technical scope of a that Child of Light Ubisoft game, minus a higher framerate and resolution.

Another example would be Project Cars. How much better is Forza 5 or GT? Most people wouldn't even tell the difference between a small budget indie game or a big budget "hype" game. If you throw Bejeweled or those infinite run games, there's a ton of s*** people can do.

When Wii U first started getting indie games, all I could imagine was smartphone games making the jump to console graphics and more complex software development.

Guacamelee is coming out for Wii U, too. That looks like Rayman Legends, IMO. Besides ZombiU plays kind of like an indie game, even though I personally enjoyed the game.

Click to expand...

None of the games you mentioned are AAA, just come from publishers that also produce AAA content. The thing is, publishers are going to really start diversifying and delivering both "indie" and AAA. Child Of Light is Ubisoft's first real attempt at going in that direction. But I don't think that it's really that hard to distinguish most Indie games from those published by a real heavy weight publisher, let alone a AAA.

@nohumanape
Well, some of us would consider ZombiU a AAA game. Go look at Q.U.B.E. or that other horror FPS that coming to Wii U. Those could pass as $30 game by big publisher standards, but will be presumably alot less, so I think Paladinrja is right that alot of this content should be cheaper.

3rd parties just need to figure out how to manage their budgets while creating good games, because then they can be creatively risky instead of financially risky.

@nohumanape
Well, some of us would consider ZombiU a AAA game. Go look at Q.U.B.E. or that other horror FPS that coming to Wii U. Those could pass as $30 game by big publisher standards, but will be presumably alot less, so I think Paladinrja is right that alot of this content should be cheaper.

3rd parties just need to figure out how to manage their budgets while creating good games, because then they can be creatively risky instead of financially risky.

Click to expand...

Everyone (especially in this thread) knows that ZombiU isn't a AAA effort from Ubisoft. That's the very reason why everyone says that it doesn't look very good. And yeah, if it were about half as long and didn't include the asymmetrical multiplayer, then sure, I'd agree that it possibly could have been a $30 "indie" title.

But, if you really want to get into game pricing, then take a good look at Nintendo. NintendoLand/$60, NSMBU/$60, NSLU/$30, WWHD/$50, Wii Sports Club/$10 (per sport) and the list could go on and on if I stepped back into the Wii generation.

“So we’re going to take the time we need to make sure the game is good (technically) when we ship it and that it also, game design-wise, makes good use of the specifics of the Wii U.”

“It wasn’t running on Wii U initially,” he said. “They were the perfect team to do it. Our Bucharest studio is super strong, super strong engineers and I was impressed by how quickly they got to get the game running on the console. And they were so autonomous in doing it. Obviously we’re communicating and we’re working together, but they were so quick and smart in doing it, it still made sense for them to keep ownership."

“Obviously they’re using the same game content, so they’re not building other game content. It’s the same game content that we’ll adapt for the needs of the specific needs of Wii U. But at the core, same game, but they made all the technical adjustments for it.”

Click to expand...

Ok, this is what I am talking about. This is Ubisoft comitted to a Wii U version of the game they announced (Watch Dogs). They've outsourced the development to technically competant sub-developer within their family, whom quickly got the game running and are mining the ISA deeper in the process; not just the UI specific features afforded by the gamepad but the system itself.

The focus here is on presenting the game technically and we know Ubisoft had in the past quickly agreed with consumer concensus that other games were not as technically presentable as those same games were on other and upencomming systems.

Whether Bucharest achieves this is yet to be seen in the final performance of the end product but the aim here is clearly to get a good, complete, technically proficient exact same game on this platform. Judging by SP Mr. Guay's comments regarding how quickly Bucharest got the game going, theres obviously been a surprising amount of progress going into steady progress.

This is what needs to happen with every publisher, else Wii U will run out of third party support as common development (PC, PS4 & X1) becomes all there is. Ecking out the facility of Wii U was never going to be possible whilst developers settled on machine translation alone. Wii U is straightforward but as studio's begin to test that, they are finding its very inexpensive and doable. I can honestly now say, that for those interested in this game, are going to get a very good game on this platform from Ubisoft. It might've been incrimental, who can blame them, but they seem determined to find the facility they need for their games on this platform and are discovering its there. Good for them.

Really?! You people have short term memory problems or are simply stupid? WII U SELLS AT A LOST AS IT IS. Yes they lowered the price a bit but that is all they could manage once their costs went down a bit. They can't give the god damn console away so stop asking them to! This is as low as they can sell it FOR NOW with only a small lost.
Ask Sony how well THAT went when they sold PS3 at a HUGE loss!!!

Click to expand...

I guess ur blood just soaked ur panties.

I'm pretty sure everyone knows that Nintendo is selling the WiiU for a loss already. The PS3 sold for a loss also, but Sony managed, Nintendo can too. They are going to have to at one point because their sales are terrible compared to the PS4 which surpassed the WiiU's total sales in 3-4 months.

Again, there is no reason for the console with inferior tech to cost so much, the game pad shouldn't be an excuse to justify. If they want to truly sell more at this point, they have to sacrifice more and hope that software sales make up for their hardware loss.

Now go clean yourself up.

Click to expand...

its not that far behind,

and actually the PS4 uses dirt cheap nearly off the shelf parts, where the wii U uses more expensive custom made tech. The Wii U hardware is more suited to the console space than what is in the PS4

Click to expand...

Just because Nintendo has a great rep in building great hardware does not mean that even outdated tech should be priced close to hardware that has more capabilities like the PS4. Thats a very poor way of justifying hardware that is pretty much like a PS3 and 360.

I'm pretty sure everyone knows that Nintendo is selling the WiiU for a loss already. The PS3 sold for a loss also, but Sony managed, Nintendo can too. They are going to have to at one point because their sales are terrible compared to the PS4 which surpassed the WiiU's total sales in 3-4 months.

Again, there is no reason for the console with inferior tech to cost so much, the game pad shouldn't be an excuse to justify. If they want to truly sell more at this point, they have to sacrifice more and hope that software sales make up for their hardware loss.

Now go clean yourself up.

Click to expand...

its not that far behind,

and actually the PS4 uses dirt cheap nearly off the shelf parts, where the wii U uses more expensive custom made tech. The Wii U hardware is more suited to the console space than what is in the PS4

Click to expand...

Just because Nintendo has a great rep in building great hardware does not mean that even outdated tech should be priced close to hardware that has more capabilities like the PS4. Thats a very poor way of justifying hardware that is pretty much like a PS3 and 360.

Click to expand...

Being a hardware engineer AND a game programmer, i can tell you you are extremely far off base. Its not "pretty much like a PS3 and 360"

and actually the PS4 uses dirt cheap nearly off the shelf parts, where the wii U uses more expensive custom made tech. The Wii U hardware is more suited to the console space than what is in the PS4

Click to expand...

Just because Nintendo has a great rep in building great hardware does not mean that even outdated tech should be priced close to hardware that has more capabilities like the PS4. Thats a very poor way of justifying hardware that is pretty much like a PS3 and 360.

Click to expand...

Being a hardware engineer AND a game programmer, i can tell you you are extremely far off base. Its not "pretty much like a PS3 and 360"

Click to expand...

Of course its capabilities are a bit past a PS3 and 360, but not touching the PS4 and Xbone. Or you care to say that I am wrong about that "engineer" and "game programmer"?

Just because Nintendo has a great rep in building great hardware does not mean that even outdated tech should be priced close to hardware that has more capabilities like the PS4. Thats a very poor way of justifying hardware that is pretty much like a PS3 and 360.

Click to expand...

Being a hardware engineer AND a game programmer, i can tell you you are extremely far off base. Its not "pretty much like a PS3 and 360"

Click to expand...

Of course its capabilities are a bit past a PS3 and 360, but not touching the PS4 and Xbone. Or you care to say that I am wrong about that "engineer" and "game programmer"?

Click to expand...

its beyond a bit actually, just thanks to its updated libraries. Its actually closer to the PS4 than it is to the PS3 or Xbox360. Infact the CPU outclasses the one in the PS4, when you take account its low pipeline and architecture among other things. (this is taking into account that the PS4 can only make use of 6 cores in games) and as for the gpu we still dont have a solid answer that you can say for sure. But we can say that the feature set is modern enough and strong enough to consistently maintain a 720p resolution with a higher IQ all while they Vsync the games flawlessly. You are just going off of popular word and that is not good enough in any debate.

Being a hardware engineer AND a game programmer, i can tell you you are extremely far off base. Its not "pretty much like a PS3 and 360"

Click to expand...

Of course its capabilities are a bit past a PS3 and 360, but not touching the PS4 and Xbone. Or you care to say that I am wrong about that "engineer" and "game programmer"?

Click to expand...

its beyond a bit actually, just thanks to its updated libraries. Its actually closer to the PS4 than it is to the PS3 or Xbox360. Infact the CPU outclasses the one in the PS4, when you take account its low pipeline and architecture among other things. (this is taking into account that the PS4 can only make use of 6 cores in games) and as for the gpu we still dont have a solid answer that you can say for sure. But we can say that the feature set is modern enough and strong enough to consistently maintain a 720p resolution with a higher IQ all while they Vsync the games flawlessly. You are just going off of popular word and that is not good enough in any debate.

Click to expand...

lol modern enough.

You are underestimating the power a console like the PS4 has have over the WiiU. Games like Arkham Knight is not coming to the WiiU due to its limits in comparison, Rocksteady pretty much said it themselves in a very nice way without insulting the WiiU. Not to mention The real capabilities of the FOX engine (as versatile as it may seem on PS3 and 360, the PS4 shows the grand difference for Ground Zeroes running at 1080p at 60 fps), and the Luminous Engine from SE to name a few, don't seem to be focused 100% on something as outdated as the WiiU which last gen systems like the PS3 and 360.

Right now it may not seem much now, but future games are eventually going to show how outdated the WiiU really is. The WiiU can produce beautiful games without a doubt, but there is no question that its capabilities are limited in comparison with its competitors. The CPU ain't much if its gpu is not up to par, making your word not good enough in any debate.

Of course its capabilities are a bit past a PS3 and 360, but not touching the PS4 and Xbone. Or you care to say that I am wrong about that "engineer" and "game programmer"?

Click to expand...

its beyond a bit actually, just thanks to its updated libraries. Its actually closer to the PS4 than it is to the PS3 or Xbox360. Infact the CPU outclasses the one in the PS4, when you take account its low pipeline and architecture among other things. (this is taking into account that the PS4 can only make use of 6 cores in games) and as for the gpu we still dont have a solid answer that you can say for sure. But we can say that the feature set is modern enough and strong enough to consistently maintain a 720p resolution with a higher IQ all while they Vsync the games flawlessly. You are just going off of popular word and that is not good enough in any debate.

Click to expand...

lol modern enough.

You are underestimating the power a console like the PS4 has have over the WiiU. Games like Arkham Knight is not coming to the WiiU due to its limits in comparison, Rocksteady pretty much said it themselves in a very nice way without insulting the WiiU. Not to mention The real capabilities of the FOX engine (as versatile as it may seem on PS3 and 360, the PS4 shows the grand difference for Ground Zeroes running at 1080p at 60 fps), and the Luminous Engine from SE to name a few, don't seem to be focused 100% on something as outdated as the WiiU which last gen systems like the PS3 and 360.

Right now it may not seem much now, but future games are eventually going to show how outdated the WiiU really is. The WiiU can produce beautiful games without a doubt, but there is no question that its capabilities are limited in comparison with its competitors. The CPU ain't much if its gpu is not up to par, making your word not good enough in any debate.

Click to expand...

Nobody ever said or implied that the PS4 was not quite more powerful. Thing is, Wii U COULD do what the PS4 does at a lower resolution and with a few less bells and whistles (such as Arkham Knight and others) but devs don't want to put the time and effort to make it happen. Install base is small and likely no money in it. You can't straight port from PS4 to Wii U so = lots of time and money to do.
It is VERY possible to have those engines running on Wii U, they just wont do it because it's not simple or cheap

Ah yes, I'm back after 4-5 months to see if people are still here...anyway...

It was an interesting read. I think Nintendo stopped being relavent when games were says that their Wii games were collecting dust. Great games, but one game every 6-7 months is no way to run a company.

Look, let's cut the BS and get right to it. Nintendo needs to make a system that is just as powerful as XB1 or PS4. Next they add their usual controller innovations and their own special 1st party games. With that they are back in the pack and competing to beat the other two instead of floundering and saying,"what til Zelda comes out next year".

current gen is almost indistinguishable from last gen anyway so what difference does it make?

Click to expand...

That, sir, is not true at all. Otherwise show me anything on PS360 that even remotely looks and performs (Frames per second) as good as Ryse and Shadow Fall, which are by the way, launch games, so you can imagine what you'll get 2 years from now as development tools and techniques for this generation mature. and improve

current gen is almost indistinguishable from last gen anyway so what difference does it make?

Click to expand...

Thats not really true they are better not by much about half of the difference from ps2 to ps3. Give how these systems are struggling with cross gen games.
That video's sources nailed it on the head about the tech in the 8th gen consoles.

I wish I was impressed by Ryse and SF as some of you are. I finally got to see the new consoles running on display kiosks, and I am so underwhelmed. They look good, but I would not upgrade from a ps360 for what I have seen thus far. I jumped on the WiiU for N games and the hope that third parties would get back on board. That latter has not happened, but I don't buy it as a power issue at all.

I wish I was impressed by Ryse and SF as some of you are. I finally got to see the new consoles running on display kiosks, and I am so underwhelmed. They look good, but I would not upgrade from a ps360 for what I have seen thus far. I jumped on the WiiU for N games and the hope that third parties would get back on board. That latter has not happened, but I don't buy it as a power issue at all.

Click to expand...

3/4ths of a consoles install base comes after half hte life span of the console. So give it time games will be there.